enough time for an announcement, page-32

shamish,
yes I was referring to Beach first gas sales by 2014 - 2015.
One only has to look at the last 5,6,7, or so, Beach presentations to see how determined Beach seems to be in developing their shale resources to supply gas for LNG export.
They are very particular in their presentations.

"Icon on the other hand do appear to need to be involved in actual LNG production to fulfill the much touted MOU."

Thats simply not correct. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that I have ever read where ICN says ICN will be involved in LNG production.
They also seem to have also said they will supply the gas (or act as some sort of "facilitaor" (my term).

You know, I agree with you and others to a certain degree.
I have almost always felt that ICN Board and Mgt lack credibilty.
Those people have a poor track record IMHO.

But what annoyed me, was that when the MOU was announced. some posters on HC labelled the ASX release wrt the MOU as being not-legitimate, a sham, etc etc.
My point all along has been that this MOU was a PLUS for us s/h - I cannot see a downside.
The worst that can happen is the Board loses even more credibility!
I still think the MOU as it stands, has to add value to ICN. But clearly the market does not share my view.
In my reading of the situation, I can see all these disparate coys working towards supplying gas to export. And guess what? ICN got the customer!
ALl they need is the gas.
Enter, Beach, BOW, maybe ESG, maybe WCL.
ICN says they have got what all these other coys covert - the customer.
If ICn can negotiate, then ICN will get a slice of the action.
If they can pull it off, how cheap will the current SP seem?